SGA 13 (2023)

Dr. Sara Abram
sara.abram(at)unipa.it
Dipartimento Culture e Società
Università di Palermo
Viale delle Scienze, Ed. 15, 90128 Palermo
Italy
–––
Dr. Zhenyu Cai
zc287(at)cam.ac.uk
Faculty of Divinity, University of Cambridge
Trinity College, Cambridge, CB2 1TQ
United Kingdom
–––
Dr. Elisa Coda
elisacoda(at)gmail.com
Centre Jean Pépin UMR 8230-ENS-PSL MSCA Fellow (THEIA Project)
7 rue Guy Môquet BP n°8, 94800 Villejuif, Paris
France
–––
Prof. Cristina D’Ancona
cristina.dancona(at)unipi.it
Dipartimento CFS
Università di Pisa
via P. Paoli 15, 56126 Pisa
Italy
–––
Prof. Marco Di Branco
marco.dibranco(at)uniroma1.it
Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia
Università di Roma “La Sapienza”
Piazzale Aldo Moro 5, 00185 Roma
Italy
–––
Dr. Banafsheh Eftekhari
b.eftekhari(at)gmail.com
Centre Jean Pépin, UMR 8230
7 rue Rue Guy Môquet BP n°8, 94800 Villejuif, Paris
France
–––
Prof. Christophe Erismann
christophe.erismann(at)univie.ac.at
Institut für Byzantinistik und Neogräzistik der Universität Wien
Postgasse 9, 3. Stock, A-1010 Wien
Austria
–––
Dr. Maria Fasciano
maria.fasciano [at] phd.unipi.it
Dipartimento CFS
Università di Pisa
via P. Paoli 15, 56126 Pisa
Italy
–––
Prof. Lenn E. Goodman
lenn.e.goodman.2(at)vanderbilt.edu
Philosophy Department
Vanderbilt University
PMB 406319
2301 Vanderbilt Place
Nashville TN 37240-6319
U.S.A.
–––
Dr. Roberto Granieri
roberto.granieri(at)kuleuven.be
KU Leuven – De Wulf-Mansion Centre for Ancient, Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy
Kardinaal Mercierplein 2, 3000 Leuven
Belgium
–––
Dr. Jawdath Jabbour
jawdath.jabbour(at)cnrs.fr
TDMAM – UMR 7297, CNRS, Aix Marseille Université
Maison méditerranéenne des sciences de l’homme
5, rue du Château de l’horloge, CS 90412
13097 Aix-en-Provence Cedex 2
France
___
Prof. M. Cüneyt Kaya
mckaya(at)istanbul.edu.tr
Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Letters
Istanbul University
Balabanaga Mh. Ordu Cad. no. 6, Laleli 34134 Fatih, Istanbul
Turkey
–––
Dr. Geneviève Lachance
Centre of Philosophy of the University of Lisbon
Alameda da Universidade, 1600-214 Lisboa
Portugal
–––
Dr. Concetta Luna
concetta.luna(at)sns.it
Scuola Normale Superiore
Piazza dei Cavalieri 7, 56126 Pisa
Italy
–––
Prof. Cecilia Martini Bonadeo
cecilia.martini(at)unipd.it
Dipartimento di Scienze Storiche Geografiche
e dell’Antichità, Università di Padova
Via del Vescovado 6, 35141 Padova
Italy
___
Dr. Teymour Morel
teymour.morel(at)unige.ch
Faculté des lettres, Université de Genève
5, rue De-Candolle, 1211 Genève 4
Switzerland
–––
Dr. Benedetto Neola
benedetto.neola(at)uni-goettingen.de
Alexander von Humboldt Postdoc Research Fellow
Institut für Religionswissenschaft
Heinrich-Düker-Weg 14
37073 Göttingen
Germany
—
Prof. Em. Josep Puig Montada
Institute for the Study of Religion
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Ciudad Universitaria
28040 – MADRID
Spain
–––
Prof. Daniel Regnier
dregnier(at)stmcollege.ca
St. Thomas More College
Department Head, Languages, Literatures and Cultural Studies
University of Saskatchewan
1437 College DR
Saskatoon SK S7N 0W6
Canada
–––
Prof. Meryem Sebti
meryem.sebti(at)cnrs.fr
Centre Jean Pépin, UMR 8230
7 rue Rue Guy Môquet BP n°8, 94800 Villejuif, Paris
France
___
Prof. Tony Street
ads46[at]cam.ac.uk
Faculty of Divinity
University of Cambridge
West Road, Cambridge, CB3 9BS
United Kingdom
–––
Dr. Leonida Vanni
leonida.vanni(at)phd.unipi.it
Dipartimento CFS
Università di Pisa
via P. Paoli 15, 56126 Pisa
Italy

Abstract:
This study explores Plotinus’ conception of μερισμός (“fragmentation”). In the first part of the study, which constitutes the present article, I analyse the notion itself of μερισμός and its significance in Plotinus’ philosophy. In a broad sense, every item in the scala entium, from intellect to bodies, is “fragmented”, since it consists of distinct parts. In its primary and most characteristic sense, however, “fragmentation” refers to the extreme instance of this phenomenon, i.e. the spatial separateness of the parts, which is a distinguishing feature of bodies. In this strict sense, (lack of) μερισμός is a key-notion in the distinction between the intelligible and the sensible domain. In the broader sense, μερισμός admits of various degrees, and serves as an indicator of the intrinsic degree of plurality that characterizes any given entity. This conception is seemingly at odds with certain statements of Plotinus, according to which the soul is not fragmented by its own nature, but becomes so in the bodily realm; however, I try to show that the two perspectives can be reconciled. The article is complemented by an analysis of Plotinus’ lexicon of fragmentation. In the second part of this study, which will form an independent article, I shall focus on the question of what the specific cause is of the fragmentation of bodies.

Abstract:
This article addresses the problematic relationship between divine transcendence and divine immanence in late antique thought from a specific perspective. The schema of the ‘divine sending’ to earth of a divine entity entrusted with a soteriological mission towards humankind will be duly analysed in both the Neoplatonic and Christian sources, focusing on pure souls according to Neoplatonic thought, such as Pythagoras and Socrates, and various figures of Christ. Through a study of the works of Iamblichus, Proclus, and Hermias of Alexandria, on the one hand, and of Eusebius of Caesarea and Cyril of Alexandria, on the other, it provides an overview of the varying ontological models that arise from the concept of the divine sending. It will thus be proved that the shared usage of the ‘sending’ pattern unveils both differences and similarities among the underlying stances concerning how to envisage the divine in itself. From this angle, it will be shown that a due qualification of the distinction between the ontic status of the ‘sender’ and of the ‘one being sent’ is of the utmost importance, since it forces to admit or to refute the existence of different, axiologically connotated, degrees of divinity. By using the ‘divine sending’ modus as a tool to explore late antique conceptions of the divine, this article sheds light on the complex relation of interferences between Neoplatonism and Christianity, revealing different and yet cognate theological world-views.

Abstract:
At De Principiis II, p. 75.10-11 Westerink, Damascius states that ‘Being will be that which provides being itself to each thing, καὶ καθ’ ὅ τι ὄν ἐστι’. The modern reference translation of the De Principiis, that of Joseph Combès for the Collection des Universités de France, renders the phrase left here in Greek as ‘et selon ce qu’elle est comme être’. Combès interprets it by stating that being is here conceived of as the constitutive unity of each form, at once responsible for both its essence and existence. I argue that both a translation and an interpretation of καθ’ ὅ τι ὄν ἐστι of the type suggested by Combès are untenable and I defend an alternative construal. The two other main modern translations, those of Ahbel-Rappe and Galpérine, are also critically assessed. The translation of the relevant phrase I propose is: ‘and in virtue of which something is a being’. I argue that being – that is the property bestowed by the Kind or Form of Being, a notion that Damascius draws from Plato’s Sophist – is here conceived of as that which is metaphysically responsible only for the fact that something is (or is a being), not also for what something is. This construal does justice to the grammar of Damascius’ text and fits better with the argument of De Principiis II, pp. 56-99 Westerink.

Abstract:
Aristotle’s Categories were translated into Armenian around the end of the fifth or the beginning of the sixth cent. CE. The first text of the Organon was transmitted alongside an anonymous commentary from which it cannot be separated. This commentary, probably a translation from Greek to Armenian, has escaped the attention of most researchers of Aristotelian philosophy in the French-speaking world due to the lack of a proper translation and a philosophical comparative study. The following article aims to offer for the first time a French translation of the Armenian commentary, more precisely of the exegesis of the Cat. 1 a 1 – 1 b 24 (Antepraedicamenta), as well as a comparative analysis of its content. The analysis will reveal that the anonymous commentary was probably written between the third and sixth centuries by a Greek-speaking commentator who was more influenced by the exegesis of Alexander of Aphrodisias than by the one of the various members of the Neoplatonic school of Rome, Athens or Alexandria.

Abstract:
This article proposes a revised chronology and analyses the conditions of emergence of a new argumentative strategy developed by Theodore the Studite and Nicephorus to defend the cult of images in reaction to the reintroduction of iconoclasm as the official religious position of the Byzantine Empire by Emperor Leo V in 815. It outlines the three main characteristics of this method, based on Aristotelian logic: the use of logical concepts, the production of numerous deductive arguments, and the denigration of the opponent on the basis of his (alleged) poor knowledge of logic.

Abstract:
Avicenna’s “flying man argument” may have a direct source in Plotinus’ thought as adapted in the ps.-Theology of Aristotle. Avicenna’s Kitāb al-Inṣāf contains a commentary on passages of the ps.-Theology which are directly relevant to the flying man argument. These passages treat of awareness, simplicity of the soul and ethical practice. I examine these passages of the Inṣāf in parallel with the source passages in the ps.-Theology and in Plotinus’ Enneads. With reference to the flying man argument as it appears in Kitāb al-Išārāt wa-l-Tanbīhāt and to Avicenna’s Metaphysics of the Šifāʾ, I argue that at least in certain contexts the flying man argument functions as a moment in a Neoplatonic ethical program.

Abstract:
Isḥāq ibn Ḥunayn’s (d. 298/910) translation of Aristotle’s De Anima is a major element of the reception of Aristotelian philosophy in the Arabo-Islamic context. This text was, until recently, considered to be lost in Arabic, where only indirect witnesses of it, besides its Latin and Hebrew translations, were left. While working on the identification of a fragmentary text that remained unmarked in the manuscript Ṭabāṭabāʾī 1367 –housed in the Library of the Parliament in Tehran, I discovered that this copy was a consequent fragment of Avicenna’s Annotations to the De Anima and that it not only presented a recension of the text different from the one previously known, but that it also contained lemmata of that recorded Isḥāq’s translation of book I and chapters II 1-2 of Aristotle’s De Anima, whose edition I am preparing. This article announces this discovery and presents the manuscript in question, the copy of Avicenna’s text it contains, and the translation of De Anima that the text preserves.

Abstract:
The purpose of this article is to use the theoretical frame proposed by Christiane Nord in her important book Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained, in order to analyze some of the most significant mistranslations of the so-called Kitāb Hurūšiyūš, the famous Arabic version of the Historiae adversus paganos by the Latin historian Paulus Orosius.

Abstract:
This article aims to introduce al-ʿĀmirī’s (d. 381/992) al-Iršād li-taṣḥīḥ al-iʿtiqād, which had been listed among his lost works in the studies on him. This text, referred to by al-ʿĀmirī himself six times in his four extant works, provides us with important insights for understanding al-ʿĀmirī’s thought, particularly his use of philosophical terminology and teachings in explaining religious doctrines, used in polemics against the theologians. After establishing al-Iršād’s position in al-ʿĀmirī’s oeuvre, I first introduce its unique manuscript at the British Library, Collection of Oriental Manuscripts, Or. 9840. I then explain its aim, content, and structure in general, and determine its approximate date of composition; finally, I present the introduction of al-Iršād as an appendix.

Abstract:
This article presents the edition and translation of the Treatise on the Immortality of the Rational Soul of Man According to Aristotle’s Opinion (M. fī baqāʾ al-nafs al-nāṭiqa min al-insān ʿalā ra ʾy Arisṭūṭālis) by the Christian philosopher and physician Abū al-Ḫayr al-Ḥasan ibn Suwār (942-post 1017). Its importance lies in the fact that: (i.) it provides the sole testimony concerning the doctrine of the immortality of the soul developed by a philosopher who was a significant representative of the intellectual life of his day; (ii.) it constitutes concrete evidence of the fact that the philosophical activity of the Baghdad Aristotelians did not concern only Aristotle’s logic, physics, and metaphysics, but also psychology and noetics; and (iii.) it transmits literal quotations from lost Arabic translations, representing their earliest testimony: three lemmata from Aristotle’s De Anima and one from Alexander of Aphrodisias’ De Anima in Isḥāq ibn Ḥunayn’s (830-911) translations.

Abstract:
In recent years, the dominant approach to understanding Avicenna’s theory of meaning is to speak in terms of a mereology of meaning. In particular, Paul Thom’s mereological interpretation of Avicenna’s theory of the predicables offers a mathematical model to illustrate how the meaning of definition is mereologically constructed from genus and differentia. This paper aims to revisit Avicenna’s semantics of definition to examine the limitations of the mereological approach. I will highlight a few texts from chapter 7, Book V, the Metaphysics of the Cure, to show that Avicenna is aware of the possibility of developing a mereological interpretation of the meaning of the definition. As I will argue, however, he explicitly rejects this possibility and develops an alternative.

Abstract:
This article reports the discovery of a fragment of the ps.-Theology of Aristotle in a codex preserved at the Library, Museum, and Documentation Center of the Parliament of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It will be shown that this fragment presents the peculiarity to accompany a copy of Averroes’ logical works, namely, the Middle Commentaries on the first four books of Aristotle’s Organon.

Abstract:
Translating a work gives it new readers, and perhaps new meanings. Ibn Ṭufayl, the Andalusian physician/philosopher (ca. 1100-1185), wrote his Arabic philosophical novel Ḥayy Ibn Yaqẓan as thought experiment. Where Avicenna had sought, notionally, to isolate his self-awareness from all bodily sensations, aiming to show that thoughts of consciousness presume no physical object, and therefore that the seat of consciousness, depends on nothing physical – not even one’s body – Ibn Ṭufayl sought, fictively, to isolate a single human being from all human exposure, assigning him, as he grew to maturity, no parental or other human contact, no language, communal upbringing, or religious tradition, seeking to determine what a brilliant, curious, and dedicated man could discover without societal support – or interference.

Abstract:
The article analyzes an unpublished Latin translation of Proclus’ Excerpta Chaldaica, preserved in two manuscripts (Allacci CXXV and XLVII) at the Vallicelliana Library, in Rome. The palaeographical analysis shows that ms. Allacci CXXV is in the hand of Lucas Holstenius (1596-1661). In the eighteenth century, Holstenius’ holograph was copied into ms. Allacci XLVII, and the translation, which Holstenius left unfinished, was completed and partly revised. The article presents the critical edition of the text, preceded by a study of the translation and of the Greek models employed by Holstenius and by the anonymous translator that later on completed his translation.

M. Di Branco, Book Announcement of “A.M. Roberts, Reason and Revelation In Byzantine Antioch. The Christian Translation Program of Abdallah ibn al-Fadl, University of California Press, Oakland 2020”, Studia graeco-arabica 12 (2022), pp. 183-4:
• p. 183: add quotation marks before “This book” and after “Christianity”.
• p. 183, line 13: after “Christianity” add “(Introduction, p. 1)”.
• p. 183, paragraph 2: the reviewer apologizes for unintentional omission of exact references to “Introduction, p. 4, §3-5”.